Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

wOBA value is based on the creation of runs each year and that is how the weights are created, and it's baed on the league average OBP.

Not attempting to be rude, but you should probably read up on wOBA a little more, and if you think edits should be made, then you should consider modifying the stat, or even contacting Tom Tango himself (he is rather easy to reach, has his own site) and talk about why these editions were not put in originally, or if he didn't think about them already.

wOBA value is based on the creation of runs each year and that is how the weights are created, and it's baed on the league average OBP.

Not attempting to be rude, but you should probably read up on wOBA a little more, and if you think edits should be made, then you should consider modifying the stat, or even contacting Tom Tango himself (he is rather easy to reach, has his own site) and talk about why these editions were not put in originally, or if he didn't think about them already.

From what i've read wOBA is a batter's stat and is supposed to tell how much value per bat a batter has. I just personally don't see how a stolen base or a hit by pitch is the result of a batter's skill.

And yup, I guess I am trying to come up with something better. Who knows what new kind of stat will be coming up. All the stats sabr heads are glossing over might seem very outdated and in a few years.

Why is a walk worth .75 of a single?
Or that an infield single is worth .85 of a single?

Where did you come up with that?

Well a wall is a free pass to first base on 4 balls. I view it less than a single simply because unless the bases are loaded, the player is going to first base and advancing any runners over.

A single is worth more simply because there is much more chance to drive in a run or 3 than a walk, also a single forces the defence to make a play. A walk very rarely does this.

Edit: A sac fly is still important as it drives in a run, however it gives up an out and it's nowhere near as hitting a single is when runners are in scoring position. You could very well argue the sac fly is worth a quarter of the vlaue as hitting a single is.

I view an infield single to be less valuable than a single than a single that a ball get into the outfield simply because there's much less chance of driving in more runs.

A good example of an infield single is an extremely well place bunt. the pitcher has no play and everyone that might be on base advances, there's a chance someone scores.

Basically the batter has a chance to generate the most runs with a single first, infield single second, then a walk third.

Well that's how I view it anyways. As to the exact number well as I said, i'm no math head. I just view a infield single to be slightly less valuable than a single, and a walk to be slightly less valuable than an infield single.

My math could be way off as I said, but I stand by what is more valuable than what.

Well a wall is a free pass to first base on 4 balls. I view it less than a single simply because unless the bases are loaded, the player is going to first base and advancing any runners over.

A single is worth more simply because there is much more chance to drive in a run or 3 than a walk, also a single forces the defence to make a play. A walk very rarely does this.

Edit: A sac fly is still important as it drives in a run, however it gives up an out and it's nowhere near as hitting a single is when runners are in scoring position. You could very well argue the sac fly is worth a quarter of the vlaue as hitting a single is.

I view an infield single to be less valuable than a single than a single that a ball get into the outfield simply because there's much less chance of driving in more runs.

A good example of an infield single is an extremely well place bunt. the pitcher has no play and everyone that might be on base advances, there's a chance someone scores.

Basically the batter has a chance to generate the most runs with a single first, infield single second, then a walk third.

Well that's how I view it anyways. As to the exact number well as I said, i'm no math head. I just view a infield single to be slightly less valuable than a single, and a walk to be slightly less valuable than an infield single.

My math could be way off as I said, but I stand by what is more valuable than what.

It looks like you are just crap-shooting estimates.

Why not look at how many runs are created across all of baseball based on each action and see what their values are? That would give you the ability to properly estimate the variance between each and thus have a proper outcome as a result.

An example, there were 8261 doubles in all of baseball in 2012, of the 21,017 runs scored in 2012, how many were created by doubles? Then you would have the exact value of a double, and could correlate it appropriately, as well correlate it to each other positive offensive value (sac bunt for example).

You also might be interested to know that overall in baseball, the sac bunt is in general, a negative run creator and actually hurts teams ability to score runs.

Why not look at how many runs are created across all of baseball based on each action and see what their values are? That would give you the ability to properly estimate the variance between each and thus have a proper outcome as a result.

An example, there were 8261 doubles in all of baseball in 2012, of the 21,017 runs scored in 2012, how many were created by doubles? Then you would have the exact value of a double, and could correlate it appropriately, as well correlate it to each other positive offensive value (sac bunt for example).

You also might be interested to know that overall in baseball, the sac bunt is in general, a negative run creator and actually hurts teams ability to score runs.

It wasn't an exact formula, but what I felt should have been prioritized (still a crapshoot yes).

As to your second paragraph, well with going by that logic, then a double could have a different value in any year. One thing i'm noticing is wOBA seems to be a changing stat (and perhaps it will change again). I'm no math wizard, but I guess it was my belief on what should be in the formula and in what order. I have a really hard time believing a hit by pitch is worth more than a walk of any kind.

As for the bunts. It's only usefull if you are trying to get that 1 extra run very late in the game and your team is having an off night hitting and you have a very bad hitter up.

No doubt, dumb overuse of the bunt results in a loss of runs because you are perposly giving up runs. The sac bunt is usefull, but only in extreme, desperate, unlikely circumstances.

In other words, if you have a player known for at least average hitting, don't give a free out and swing the freaking bat!

I am with you on including IBB and excluding HBP. However, what you've done here is just throw out random numbers. Jeffy is right, if you want to suggest such changes, why not talk to Tango? wOBA, currently, is the best statistic in the sport for correlation with runs. It is the best we have. Instead of changing the values, why not discuss with Tom why HBP is included and IBB isn't?

Why not do some of your own math to figure out how much an IBB is worth in relation to other events?

Before I start, this is just to measure how far a player would get around the diamond on avg per plate appearance.

If a player hit's a homerun he would go around all the bases.

If a player hits a double he would go half way around the bases.

A triple would be 75 percent around the bases.

A single and a walk would be 25 percent around the bases. And before you say a single isn't the same as a walk of course not, however they both do advance the player to first base regardless.

This is simply to measure the percentage a player gets around the bases per at bat.

So let's take the triple crown winner Miguel Cabrera.

Cabrera hit 44 Home runs, 40 Doubles, 117 singles and had 66 walks.

The Formula thus is.

(66*0.25=16.5)+ (117*0.25=29.25)+(40*0.5=20)+
(0*.75=0)+(44*1=44)

Add 16.5, 29.25, 20 and 44 together and you get 109.75.

Cabrera has 697 Plate Appearences thus

109.75
______
697

Thus Cabrera's PoA is 0.1574605.

What that means is simply Cabrera averages at 15.7% around the bases per at bat. Or the rate around the bases he got per at bat.

Interestingly enough, if you take Cabrera's 697 plate appearances divided by the number of games he played he averaged.

697
_____
161

Cabrera averaged 4.3291925 plate appearances per game.

If you take his PoA of 0.1574605 and times it by his averaged plate appearances per game of 4.3291925 it would equal that Cabrera got around the bases at an average of 0.6816768 per game.

Or Cabrera got around the bases at an average rate of just over 68% per game total, or you can say he's worth over 2 bases per game, but not quite 3.

If a player is at 0.50 per game than that player is worth 2 bases per game, or in other words a double.

Another interesting thing is if you take the average PoA per game at 0.6816768 and times it by the number of games he has played in it would say that throughout the whole year he made a PoA total of 109.74513.

Remarkably close to how many runs he has scored.

So what does this all mean? Probably not much as i've done no where as much research as the other professionals who did the advanced stats.

I guess there are just times when i get curious and run numbers when I get into it.

It was fun to come up with this make believe stat."

It's just to measure how far a player get's around the bases with the hits the player has and the walks the player has.

The forumula is NOT saying that a walk has the same value as a hit, but that both have the player ending up at first base.